Dressing Sheep in Wolves Clothing (Mod Warning page 35)

[bb_fan]

Well it kinda is. You can't quantify it, or see it.

I'm not denying that it doesn't exists to some degree in sports.

My argument is every single body check doesn't create momentum one way or the other. Some do, many don't.

I'd argue putting the puck in your opponents net does far more to create momentum than any sort of body check.

who is arguing that every single one does create momentum though?

I haven't heard that once in this thread.

like a lot of things out here, this devolves down into an all or nothing argument when in reality, like a lot of things, it is not 100% yes or no.

I'd also argue that physical play, out hitting your opponent, throwing big hits all contribute to putting the puck in your opponent's net.

And I don't see the people (like myself) that think this team needs to be more physical arguing it at the expense of players like Debrusk, Pasta, Marchand, Bergeron, Krejci (although he's another story).

 

[DrJustice]

I wasn't impressed with what i saw from Acciari down the stretch. Wasn't nearly as physical as he was at the start of the season, but he could have been pretty banged up. I'd like to see Blidh get another chance, maybe even as a 13th.

I'm a little higher on Acciari. This was his first real full season in the NHL so I think he will be more consistent with that experience and confidence under his belt. Not that he is going to score 15 goals or anything but just more consistent in his role as a 4th line RW (believe he was a career center before that). Plus you have a lot of versatility with him, Kuraly and Wagner all being able to play center if injuries arise. And none of them are overpaid (in a hard cap league, very important). If he doesn't elevate his game, you put Blidh on the right side and let him go at the end of the year.

I agree that the team didn't bring the edge that it takes to win a Cup in the playoffs (specifically against Tampa). But I do think there are guys like Blidh that have potential to be good 4th liners that doesn't require the team to have to bring more than one bottom six player in via FA. Colby Cave is another guy who I think deserves a shot internally who could make a difference.

 

[bb_fan]

Yes, I get it. It's got to suck when your own words are used to invalidate your own nonsensical argument. Has to be frustrating for you.

If you want to get tougher, that's fine. But being tougher doesn't mean anything if you can't score goals, which is why they lost to Tampa. They put in 2 goals per game in the 4 losses. So going out and getting one dimensional players like Reaves doesn't do anything other than improve your interest in watching the games because he throws the odd big hit from time to time. It doesn't make then better. It doesn't fix their second line hole at wing. It doesn't fix their 3rd line and the lack of scoring. It won't make their defensive core more balanced. So sure, go get Reaves. I just don't believe it will fix their issues and make them a stronger playoff team.

so lets be crystal clear here then.

it sounds like and comes across like you are saying physical play has no effect on the game.

big hits have no effect on the game.

it actually sounds like you are saying that a typical Pasternak check has no more effect on the game than a typical Lucic, Wilson, Reaves, Clutterbuck etc etc etc hit.

I mean, just so we are clear on what you are actually trying to say.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

I wasn't impressed with what i saw from Acciari down the stretch. Wasn't nearly as physical as he was at the start of the season, but he could have been pretty banged up. I'd like to see Blidh get another chance, maybe even as a 13th. He's also got a ****-disturber type of vibe going for him, which i like.

Acciari had a sports hernia I think and is getting surgery. I thought he sucked too, but given that he was playing hurt I guess he gets a bit of a pass. I wouldn't mind seeing Backes on the 4th line at even strength and Acciari as the extra forward next year assuming they can give the 3rd line a facelift and make it a speed/skill line.

 

[LSCII]

so lets be crystal clear here then.

it sounds like and comes across like you are saying physical play has no effect on the game.

big hits have no effect on the game.

it actually sounds like you are saying that a typical Pasternak check has no more effect on the game than a typical Lucic, Wilson, Reaves, Clutterbuck etc etc etc hit.

I mean, just so we are clear on what you are actually trying to say.

Thank you for missing the point entirely.

Hits are hits. If you want a guy to be more physical and throw effective hits, who cares to differentiate whether the hit was a big hit or not so big? Either it was effective and did the job or it wasn't. No need to break it down into categories, no?

Since I answered your question, I have one or two for you now: If you say in one post that you want the team to be tougher and to play more physically, and then turn around and say in another post that you really want a guy that throws highlight reel hits and blows people up, what are you really saying? Because this is what I seem to be struggling with.

Either you have guys that can play physical and throw hits or you don't. What does it matter if the guy throws big hits or not so big hits? Hence why I used the example earlier of Chara rubbing someone out along the boards as being physical, but not big. Which Sheppy then clarified, that he doesn't want rub outs, but BIG HITS!

So I guess my question is that when people in this thread say physical play, that isn't code for BIG f***ING HITS, is it? Because it sure seems like that's what is being said. Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm dense. But it really comes off like some of the folks in the pro physical play side are really calling for BIG f***ING HITS!!!

 

[Sheppy]

Jesus f***ing Christ, man. I'm saying be heavier on the body, hit hard and if the chance presents itself, unload one. You're so condescending it's not even funny. The Bruins passed up on making a statement hit numerous times... Other teams didn't when Pastrnak, Krug, Marchand were on the ice.

 

[LSCII]

Jesus ****ing Christ, man. I'm saying be heavier on the body, hit hard and if the chance presents itself, unload one. You're so condescending it's not even funny. The Bruins passed up on making a statement hit numerous times... Other teams didn't when Pastrnak, Krug, Marchand were on the ice.

Yeah, and they've passed on the opportunity to stand up for their teammates in years gone by when they had the chance to as well. Even when they had physical, tougher players on the roster. So I simply don't see it as changing much in the series vs Tampa this year if they had a guy like Roussel or Reaves, or <insert your preferred tough guy's name here> That's it.

 

[BruinDust]

who is arguing that every single one does create momentum though?

I haven't heard that once in this thread.

like a lot of things out here, this devolves down into an all or nothing argument when in reality, like a lot of things, it is not 100% yes or no.

I'd also argue that physical play, out hitting your opponent, throwing big hits all contribute to putting the puck in your opponent's net.

And I don't see the people (like myself) that think this team needs to be more physical arguing it at the expense of players like Debrusk, Pasta, Marchand, Bergeron, Krejci (although he's another story).

I guess you missed the sentence after that where I said some hits do, but many don't.

This thread is essentially an evaluation of the 3rd and 4th lines. I don't like the mix of those 2 lines, I'm glad a few of them are UFAs and hope they aren't back in Boston.

It's not black and white, and hitting does have an impact, but it's very much overrated by some. No different than the fanboys on the main board who keep telling me what a great hockey player Jack Eichel is because he can toe-drag dangle with the best of them. Toe-drag dangles look real pretty, but don't result much in the way of goals scored of games won.

 

[Sheppy]

Yeah, and they've passed on the opportunity to stand up for their teammates in years gone by when they had the chance to as well. Even when they had physical, tougher players on the roster. So I simply don't see it as changing much in the series vs Tampa this year if they had a guy like Roussel or Reaves, or <insert your preferred tough guy's name here> That's it.

Fair enough, and I disagree with it. I think Boston plays their best hockey when they're engaged physically, you don't. It's all good.

 

[BMC]

Jesus ****ing Christ, man. I'm saying be heavier on the body, hit hard and if the chance presents itself, unload one. You're so condescending it's not even funny. The Bruins passed up on making a statement hit numerous times... Other teams didn't when Pastrnak, Krug, Marchand were on the ice.

That infuriated me no end- Pasta, Krug & Gryz were hammered every time they had the puck or even went near it. That had to take a toll not just physically but mentally as well.

I'm not saying the Bs should go out of their way to make the big hit & get taken out the play. I'm saying they should physically pressure opponents constantly when they're on defense, that will help reduce scoring chances. If you're constantly being jammed you can't set up your offense or even get out of your own end. TB did this to perfection against the Bruins, how many times did Krug or Miller or even McAvoy had to ice the puck because they couldn't break TB's constant pressure?

 

[PB37]

What does that have to do with anything? If you want to get technical Reaves is still playing while your beloved Pens are golfing.

Lol, I think this conversation went over your head. Penguins won two stanley cups in a row without an without an overt, physical group of forwards or even D. You're the one interjecting nonsense into the discussion by adding in Reaves onto a roster that he was not on.

And I hate the Pens, thanks for playing.

 

[LSCII]

Fair enough, and I disagree with it. I think Boston plays their best hockey when they're engaged physically, you don't. It's all good.

In reality, our opinions aren't that far off. I love good physical play and tough players. My favorite player of all time is Terry O'Reilly, ffs.

Where I think the real problem with this team lies is in the core group of leaders. They seem to be too passive, and too content to remain calm and even tempered even when they shouldn't. They very rarely show any emotion, and as such, have had some epic collapses during their time here. 14 against MTL after being the best team in the league all year long. The choke up 3 to 1 and 3 to 1 against Philly. Crapping the bed down the stretch in the playoff hunt two years in a row. Pissing down their leg against Tampa this year. Losing to a bad Carolina team, etc. Something is just off about the team leaders for some reason, and I don't think getting any singular physical player will change it either. It's got to be a change in the leadership, which is a big reason why I think they went out and got Backes. Unfortunately for the team, that didn't work out so well to this point.

 

[bluetib]

Thank you for missing the point entirely.

Hits are hits. If you want a guy to be more physical and throw effective hits, who cares to differentiate whether the hit was a big hit or not so big? Either it was effective and did the job or it wasn't. No need to break it down into categories, no?

Since I answered your question, I have one or two for you now: If you say in one post that you want the team to be tougher and to play more physically, and then turn around and say in another post that you really want a guy that throws highlight reel hits and blows people up, what are you really saying? Because this is what I seem to be struggling with.

Either you have guys that can play physical and throw hits or you don't. What does it matter if the guy throws big hits or not so big hits? Hence why I used the example earlier of Chara rubbing someone out along the boards as being physical, but not big. Which Sheppy then clarified, that he doesn't want rub outs, but BIG HITS!

So I guess my question is that when people in this thread say physical play, that isn't code for BIG ****ING HITS, is it? Because it sure seems like that's what is being said. Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm dense. But it really comes off like some of the folks in the pro physical play side are really calling for BIG ****ING HITS!!!

He simply said that he was tired of seing missed opportunities for a real contact instead of brushed past checks.

 

[BMC]

In reality, our opinions aren't that far off. I love good physical play and tough players. My favorite player of all time is Terry O'Reilly, ffs.

Where I think the real problem with this team lies is in the core group of leaders. They seem to be too passive, and too content to remain calm and even tempered even when they shouldn't. They very rarely show any emotion, and as such, have had some epic collapses during their time here. 14 against MTL after being the best team in the league all year long. The choke up 3 to 1 and 3 to 1 against Philly. Crapping the bed down the stretch in the playoff hunt two years in a row. Pissing down their leg against Tampa this year. Losing to a bad Carolina team, etc. Something is just off about the team leaders for some reason, and I don't think getting any singular physical player will change it either. It's got to be a change in the leadership, which is a big reason why I think they went out and got Backes. Unfortunately for the team, that didn't work out so well to this point.

w/r/t quiet core leaders- They have us LFers to lose our minds so they don't have to

 

[EverettMike]

Every year the Bruins don't win the Stanley Cup the same people say it's because they aren't "tough enough" and need someone on the fourth line to play 8 minutes and fight.

Some years the team isn't tough enough, but they also tend to not be skilled enough even more. The Bs effort sucked against Tampa for the most part, but what hurt even more was Krejci, Backes, and Rick Nash, three guys with big salaries, did nothing. Also our defense, which includes both Kevan Miller and Adam McQuaid, couldn't make a breakout pass to save their lives.

The Penguins can win two cups without anyone resembling the type of player being advocated for here, and the Knights can make the Final with one guy playing eight minutes every third game. Rosters are made up of 20+ guys, and being tough and physical is important. I love physical hockey myself. But the incessant desire for our very own Ryan f***ing Reeves is the lamest debate for the 8th straight year on this board.

And let the record show, the exact same arguments were made for Zac Rinaldo when we gave up a f***ing 3rd for his useless, dirty corpse.

 

[BruinDust]

Lol, I think this conversation went over your head. Penguins won two stanley cups in a row without an without an overt, physical group of forwards or even D. You're the one interjecting nonsense into the discussion by adding in Reaves onto a roster that he was not on.

And I hate the Pens, thanks for playing.

He simply said that he was tired of seing missed opportunities for a real contact instead of brushed past checks.

One thing I noticed about both Penguin championship teams, was how often they bailed on checks along the wall once the puck was gone.

To them, it seemed to be far more important to get back and swarm the puck carrier with man-on-man coverage and force the turnover where the puck actually was.

The same type of defense and coverage Vegas are using to pretty darn good success. You watch them defend and it's like having 7 guys on the ice. Winnipeg had a real hard time getting to the middle of the ice for clean looks of the cycle, there was always a Vegas player hounding the puck carrier.

Why waste all this energy with the old mantra "finish every check" when many checks have minimal effect, as most of them are along the boards and guys just brace themselves on the boards and absorb the contact. These teams have figured out there are bigger fish to fry, mainly getting the possession of the puck back.

I love how Dustin Byfuglien hits, because he's so good at picking his spots and laying hits that hurt and have impact on the game. You don't see out running around trying to smash everyone.

 

[BiggioRainesHOF]

In reality, our opinions aren't that far off. I love good physical play and tough players. My favorite player of all time is Terry O'Reilly, ffs.

Where I think the real problem with this team lies is in the core group of leaders. They seem to be too passive, and too content to remain calm and even tempered even when they shouldn't. They very rarely show any emotion, and as such, have had some epic collapses during their time here. 14 against MTL after being the best team in the league all year long. The choke up 3 to 1 and 3 to 1 against Philly. Crapping the bed down the stretch in the playoff hunt two years in a row. Pissing down their leg against Tampa this year. Losing to a bad Carolina team, etc. Something is just off about the team leaders for some reason, and I don't think getting any singular physical player will change it either. It's got to be a change in the leadership, which is a big reason why I think they went out and got Backes. Unfortunately for the team, that didn't work out so well to this point.

I'm not sure it's a leadership problem, I feel like the Bruins have had a consistently pretty good core since the lockout. Good enough to be a consistent playoff contender. Good enough to have great regular seasons mixed in with a few shaky ones. But definitely not great or dynastic levels of talent.

Said differently, if you show up enough to the playoffs with a good team, you'll both run into some hot streaks and some gag jobs, and both of those can be representative of teams catching some puck, health, goalie luck.

2010 (blowing a 3-0 lead) into 2011 and 2013 into 2014 (choking against the Habs) are pretty illustrative of how that can happen.

 

[bb_fan]

Thank you for missing the point entirely.

Hits are hits. If you want a guy to be more physical and throw effective hits, who cares to differentiate whether the hit was a big hit or not so big? Either it was effective and did the job or it wasn't. No need to break it down into categories, no?

Since I answered your question, I have one or two for you now: If you say in one post that you want the team to be tougher and to play more physically, and then turn around and say in another post that you really want a guy that throws highlight reel hits and blows people up, what are you really saying? Because this is what I seem to be struggling with.

Either you have guys that can play physical and throw hits or you don't. What does it matter if the guy throws big hits or not so big hits? Hence why I used the example earlier of Chara rubbing someone out along the boards as being physical, but not big. Which Sheppy then clarified, that he doesn't want rub outs, but BIG HITS!

So I guess my question is that when people in this thread say physical play, that isn't code for BIG ****ING HITS, is it? Because it sure seems like that's what is being said. Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm dense. But it really comes off like some of the folks in the pro physical play side are really calling for BIG ****ING HITS!!!

so thats your actual honest answer and opinion.

all hits are equal.

doesnt matter if its Chara or Krug, or pasternak or Wilson.

they are all equal in your eyes.

if i were you i wouldn't be talking about people missing the point (unless you are taking a good look in the mirror?) because i am not missing your point at all.

you don't see any difference in a hit, you don't see any different results, any different impact, nada, nothing zippo.

You think everyone on the ice that sees Pasternak coming in on the forecheck to make a hit vs a Reaves or Wilson feels the exact same way as you, that the hit will be exactly the same.

as for your questions, my stance and what i have been saying have been very consistent, if you want to cherry pick phrases from one conversation to another and split hairs over it, thats your choice, but its pretty intellectually dishonest and i'd like to think your are smart enough to know that, but then again that means if you are then you are just being obtuse on purpose.

big hits. more physical. i could careless what you want to call it. Lay some people out (as in knock them over) make them feel it, make them not want to get hit, make them get rid of the puck a bit earlier than they want to, make them think twice about being the first one to a loose puck on the boards, put some pressure on them that they will react to, wear them out a bit. if thats your idea of blood lust and just wanting to see random violence and BIG f***ING HITS for no point, then again, you are the one who really does not get the point at all.

as for you BIG CAPS and other comments, dense isn't what i'd call it......

 

[bb_fan]

Every year the Bruins don't win the Stanley Cup the same people say it's because they aren't "tough enough" and need someone on the fourth line to play 8 minutes and fight.

Some years the team isn't tough enough, but they also tend to not be skilled enough even more. The Bs effort sucked against Tampa for the most part, but what hurt even more was Krejci, Backes, and Rick Nash, three guys with big salaries, did nothing. Also our defense, which includes both Kevan Miller and Adam McQuaid, couldn't make a breakout pass to save their lives.

The Penguins can win two cups without anyone resembling the type of player being advocated for here, and the Knights can make the Final with one guy playing eight minutes every third game. Rosters are made up of 20+ guys, and being tough and physical is important. I love physical hockey myself. But the incessant desire for our very own Ryan ****ing Reeves is the lamest debate for the 8th straight year on this board.

And let the record show, the exact same arguments were made for Zac Rinaldo when we gave up a ****ing 3rd for his useless, dirty corpse.

do me a favor and find everyone saying that, i am pretty curious were they are all at?

and let the record show Brett Connoly and two second round picks say hi back. or what did they give for Nash again....

Boston Bruins History: Five Best Trade Deadline Deals

5 Worst Trade Deadline Deals in Boston Bruins History

not all trades work out or are smart moves.

Pigeon holing this conversation into Ryan f***ing Reevs everytime is actually a hell of a lot lamer when thats not whats actually going on here.

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

Every year the Bruins don't win the Stanley Cup the same people say it's because they aren't "tough enough" and need someone on the fourth line to play 8 minutes and fight.

Some years the team isn't tough enough, but they also tend to not be skilled enough even more. The Bs effort sucked against Tampa for the most part, but what hurt even more was Krejci, Backes, and Rick Nash, three guys with big salaries, did nothing. Also our defense, which includes both Kevan Miller and Adam McQuaid, couldn't make a breakout pass to save their lives.

The Penguins can win two cups without anyone resembling the type of player being advocated for here, and the Knights can make the Final with one guy playing eight minutes every third game. Rosters are made up of 20+ guys, and being tough and physical is important. I love physical hockey myself. But the incessant desire for our very own Ryan ****ing Reeves is the lamest debate for the 8th straight year on this board.

And let the record show, the exact same arguments were made for Zac Rinaldo when we gave up a ****ing 3rd for his useless, dirty corpse.

Weren't all 3 of those guys injured?

 

[Dr Hook]

Weren't all 3 of those guys injured?

Nash, post-concussion, Backes had the leg, but Krejci was apparently fine- he jetted off to Denmark after game 5 and played for Czech. Rep.

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

Nash, post-concussion, Backes had the leg, but Krejci was apparently fine- he jetted off to Denmark after game 5 and played for Czech. Rep.

Really? I knew about the other 2, but I thought for sure with the way Krejci played he must have been injured.

Weird.

@JP Nolan Thoughts?

 

[Over the volcano]

Really? I knew about the other 2, but I thought for sure with the way Krejci played he must have been injured.

Weird.

@JP Nolan Thoughts?

Krejci’s two linemate were injured (debrusk and Nash) not sure what he could do against Tampa with those two in their condition.

 

[LSCII]

so thats your actual honest answer and opinion.

all hits are equal.

doesnt matter if its Chara or Krug, or pasternak or Wilson.

they are all equal in your eyes.

if i were you i wouldn't be talking about people missing the point (unless you are taking a good look in the mirror?) because i am not missing your point at all.

you don't see any difference in a hit, you don't see any different results, any different impact, nada, nothing zippo.

You think everyone on the ice that sees Pasternak coming in on the forecheck to make a hit vs a Reaves or Wilson feels the exact same way as you, that the hit will be exactly the same.

as for your questions, my stance and what i have been saying have been very consistent, if you want to cherry pick phrases from one conversation to another and split hairs over it, thats your choice, but its pretty intellectually dishonest and i'd like to think your are smart enough to know that, but then again that means if you are then you are just being obtuse on purpose.

big hits. more physical. i could careless what you want to call it. Lay some people out (as in knock them over) make them feel it, make them not want to get hit, make them get rid of the puck a bit earlier than they want to, make them think twice about being the first one to a loose puck on the boards, put some pressure on them that they will react to, wear them out a bit. if thats your idea of blood lust and just wanting to see random violence and BIG ****ING HITS for no point, then again, you are the one who really does not get the point at all.

as for you BIG CAPS and other comments, dense isn't what i'd call it......

And big hitters tend to run around more trying to chase the elusive big hit, resulting in them being caught out of position quite a bit. Which in turn creates scoring chances for the other team despite your beliefs.

I also disagree that the amplitude of a hit makes you a more physical player. In fact, I'd say it's patently false. Chara is a very physical player. He takes the body every chance he gets. He cleans out in front of the net, he hits guys in scrums, he face washes guys, he drops the gloves when needed, and he uses his stick very well. All of that isn't what anyone would ever call a big hit, yet it's physical as hell, whether you can admit it or not. But hey, yeah! Big hits!! Awesome!! Because Reaves threw 3 hits a game in a playoff series, one of which was like super big and stuff!! Yeah!! We need that!! Oh wait, it doesn't matter. At all. Ever.

I can do this all day if you'd like. Maybe it would be easier for you to accept that not everyone on the internet sees things the same way as you and simply move on though? Just a thought. Totally up to you.

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

Krejci’s two linemate were injured (debrusk and Nash) not sure what he could do against Tampa with those two in their condition.

IDK.

Guess I'm used to 7 million dollar guys being able to carry a line. I must be out of touch.